Privacy: National Security vs. The Fourth Amendment
Privacy! It’s an elementary principle we all value and fight to protect. However, with technological trends, such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Snapchat, our lives have now become accessible to all. These social media platforms have become part of our daily lives, from sharing personal information or activities to communal networking. The fascination to be trendy and acquire followers, is compromising our privacy principles and places us at significant risk. It’s remarkably easy to pretend that we control what personal information we share, however, realistically we leave technological trails every day we login to these apps, or browse the internet. For the most part, it seems that
…show more content…
Under the Bush Administration, the Protect America Act was passed in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11th, 2001. As a result, in 2007, the National Security Agency designed and operated a surveillance program called ‘Prism’. The programs’ intent is to gather web communications from major United States internet corporations. Under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Prism collects suspicious stored web communication and further employs communication companies such as, Verizon, to turn over all data that included court-approved terms, that indicated conspiracies targeted to compromise our national security. ("NSA PRISM Slides - IC OFF THE RECORD," 2013). Now, you may feel conflicted about their approach to securing our safety, but some are certain that this is undoubtedly a breech in our civil liberties. Lee (2013), states, “Civil liberties groups warned that the PAA 's vague requirements and lack of oversight would give the government a green light to seek indiscriminate access to the private communications of Americans. They predicted that the government would claim that they needed unfettered access to domestic communications to be sure they had gotten all relevant information about suspected terrorists.” Imagine we have a government that justifies spying on its citizens without any legal authorization to do so. The exploit our trust by suggesting that they
A few months ago, Edward Snowden leaked confidential information about a NSA surveillance program known as PRISM. NSA agents have been recording and listening to our phone calls, reading our text messages and emails, and archiving our activities. There has been controversy about whether it is a violation of our privacy right. There has been a lot of talk about abuse of this program. Journalists have been the primary target of this unauthorized surveillance according to some report. I intend to find out if there is any abuse of this program, and also whether it violates our fourth amendment right or not.
The Fourth Amendment is the right for people to be secure in their homes, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizure. The amendment also states that warrants will not be issued unless they are issued under probable cause. This amendment is the biggest factor in the case of Omaha Herald v. Police, however, this case cannot as easily be defined by the Fourth Amendment can be and there are arguments and cases which can be made for both sides.
There are many good reasons that the Fourth Amendment is in order but there is also the fact that peoples’ privacy can be invaded using this amendment. Communications can be collected and retained, the communications receive no special protection, and nothing would prohibit the NSA from sharing information with military prosecutors. Communications received and given away can also include foreign intelligence information. This Amendment allows the NSA to maintain “knowledge databases” which the databases house internet data, including metadata that reveals online activities, as well as telephone numbers and email addresses that the agency had reason to believe are being used by U.S. people. Whenever a phone “moves into a new service area” updates
The Fourth Amendment allows U.S. citizen to feel secure. And that security is not going to change because the fourth amendment is “set in stone” (salon.com, 2013). Obama did speak on the security of phone calls and he said the government looks at the duration phone calls and their numbers. However, he did go on to say “This program, by the way, is fully overseen not just by Congress, but by the FISA Court, a court specially put together to evaluate classified programs to make sure that the executive branch, or government generally, is not abusing them and that they’re — it’s being out consistent with the Constitution and rule of law” (www.fednews.com). The Judicial Oversight on the information that the government receives allows citizens to
“No one should live in fear of being stopped whenever he leaves his home to go about the activities of daily life” said by Shira Scheindlin, a United States District Court judge from New York City. The Fourth Amendment protects the rights of all U.S American citizens. The Fourth Amendment states that all authorities need a warrant to search a home or property. The Founding Fathers created this amendment so, the future American citizens were free from unwanted intrusions from the government. It additionally secures that all search and seizures must be plausible. However, an authority should have the right to run a search and seizure on the spot, if they have probable cause. The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution should protect the privacy
The Fourth Amendment provides citizen the freedom of privacy. The expectation of privacy is covered under the Fourth Amendment in order to protect this privacy. I strongly believe that an officer should obtain a search warrant in order to violate one's right to privacy when crossing the boundary of personal items. By searching an individual backpack, purse or wallet, one's privacy is invaded. According to the court in People v. Cregan personal items such as cigarette packs (found in pockets), wallets, or purses may be searched due to these items being inaccessibility of the individual at the time of an arrest. This ruling allows officers to violate one's privacy by searching these items; even though, the items are personal to the individual.
The government is always watching to ensure safety of their country, including everything and everyone in it. Camera surveillance has become an accepted and almost expected addition to modern safety and crime prevention (“Where” para 1). Many people willingly give authorization to companies like Google and Facebook to make billions selling their personal preferences, interests, and data. Canada participates with the United States and other countries in monitoring national and even global communications (“Where” para 2). Many question the usefulness of this kind of surveillance (Hier, Let, and Walby 1).However, surveillance, used non-discriminatorily, is, arguably, the key technology to preventing terrorist plots (Eijkman 1). Government
The right to privacy has not been explicitly stated, but it has been found in a number of amendments. The fourth amendment is a good example because it restricts agents from searching people without a warrant or reasonable evidence that they have committed a crime. Privacy is an important thing to people, even when the topic is completely appropriate. It is something people like about only telling things to certain people. No one is going to tell the whole country or the whole world something that they recently experienced. They would have no interest in anyone except a chosen few to tell something like that to. These chosen people would be those that are close to that person, especially if they are friends or family. For this reason, it would
The Fourth Amendment is another interesting Amendment which involve searches and seizure. In the U.S., cops generally require a court affirmed warrant to lead an inquiry of a private home or business and gather proof identifying with a criminal action. Portrayal from their opposing association with British powers within the colonial days, the composers of the Constitution instituted that procurement to secure natives' protection and guarantee that police did not mishandle their authority. Today, as wrongdoing battling innovation has developed more refined and police observation more complete, such laws have ended up open to different understandings by officers and the courts.
Americans security and the Fourth Amendment have been conflicting since the origin of the amendment. Some Americans started to be at odds with whether their security is at risk with the amendment, yet other citizens feel that privacy is equally important. With the coming of the twenty first century complications between the two are certainly bound to occur. Since the coming of the digital age and mass production of personal electronics, people’s privacy becomes imminent. Simple reasoning shows America rebelled from Great Britain; and one of those reasons for America to fight for its independence is that there was no sensible privacy was being showed. Although the Fourth Amendment tries to protect the privacy of Americans data, it should be
The search and seizure stipulate that the Fourth Amendment is about privacy. It gives a prevision of protection of personal privacy to every citizen’s right, not to serve as a fixed protection against the misuse of the government, but to be free from unreasonable government intrusion into individuals lives. There is an understanding that one must know when looking into the Fourth Amendment and expecting protection, that must be considered. It serves as a protection for the rights of the people during police stops, arrests, searches and seizures of homes, papers and businesses. It has been placed to be a legal mechanical device to ensure that people’s rights are treated fairly under limited circumstances from those who are in a legal position. The Fourth Amendment stretches out to demonstrate the protection of search and seizure. This constitutional protection is provided to individuals in many scenarios. When police have a valid search warrant, a valid arrest warrant or the belief that probable cause in which a crime has been committed it shows that law enforcement has validation or at least a solid belief of probable cause during a search or seizure, but just so you understand the police can override your privacy, your concerns and conduct a search of you and your personal space. Law is a concrete form of rules that has been placed in a foundation that was established for policy holders to refer back to encase there is a need for an exclusionary rule (Nd 2014). During my
The Fourth Amendment, provides protection to individuals during searches and detentions, and also prevents unlawfully seized items from being used as evidence against an individual in criminal cases. This simply means that no authority figure can pull you over, arrest you, or search you without a valid reason. The only way that an authority figure can actually pull you over or arrest you is if you are doing something illegal, although there are a few exceptions.
"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Social Media is a current way in which people are using to interact with one another daily. Since the launch of various Social Networking Sites (SNS) its been a huge attraction in a new way to share information with others and correspond with interests of your choice in many different forms. Although social media sites allow users to share information with friends and other sites on the internet, many people are unaware of how their privacy is getting out. Now that the expansion of global connection through these social media networking sites are so highly present in todays society, giving us easy access to information, the lack of one's privacy is being diminished. Everyday peoples privacy rights are
Do you ever feel like you are being watched or followed, feels a little creepy right? That is exactly what is happening every time you log into one of the many social media sites offered via the world wide web. Some users say that if you aren’t doing anything wrong, what does it matter if our every move is being tracked and recorded. It matters because our privacy is being violated, having privacy is one of our basic human rights. When we sign up on social media we knowingly give up that right as Kent Anderson, author of “People are Willing to Trade Less Privacy for Access to Social Media”, writes, “ Social networks are based on sharing information, so anyone using such a network is automatically accepting